... for bots to spike tweets like this

explain to the host that any gun can easily be turned into a semi auto assault weapon type gun.

While that is probably not true to begin with, if it is I say all the more reason to remove all guns to well regulated militias where they belong.

Not even close to being true. You can’t modify a revolver to be a semi-automatic assault weapon. Nor can you modify a single shot bolt action rifle.

That’s one of those false arguments whose basis is “people are going to do it anyway, so no regulation/law will change anything.” Somehow those people don’t feel the same about drug laws or abortion.

First you have to know where to get the parts to do that. Then you have to know how to buy them without exposing your self. then you have to know how to pay for them - same reason. Then you have to know how to install them - for sure, no legal gunsmith will do the work. Then you have to hope the parts you bought and installed work properly. That's some dangerous stuff there....

Stupid argument.. There is no reason at all for people to own automatic weapons. Practically speaking, if you can't hit the target with a single shot then you are incompetent and should not own a firearm.

Civil War and Revolutionary War smooth bore muskets. They are "weapons of war" should they be illegal to own.

IE you wouldn't mind carrying them into battle vs Russian troops in the Ukraine tomorrow if our commitments to NATO required it?

Cause otherwise, they are not currently weapons of war. They are items from the history of war.

Maybe you will ask us about Yew Bows, Pitchforks, and the Chain Mace next? Since those were all once used in wars?

Doesn't say which war.

What if it was known to cause cancer for everyone around it but not you?

I own neither.

And what is your safe hobby?

If your hobby is guns, that hobby kills people.

do you debate that?

Trying to appeal to gun people to give up their hobby for the greater good always turns out like this.

You neglected to answer the question last time.

Rather than being spoon fed subclauses in case of potential irrelevant arguments made purely to try and distract.

Did you think that they meant that pitchforks, grain scythes, walking sticks, fist size rocks, sling size pebbles, and every weapon used in a war at any point in history should be illegal to own? I am going to continue to make the assumption that you are smarter than that.

In which case you knew what they meant, and you decided to try and troll them. You can be better than that. I hope you will be in the future.

It will fire one shot every time you pull the trigger until you run out of bullets.

and then they tie up the conversation with all their knowledge of guns.

They must live sad lives if that's what it takes to make them feel like a man. Most of them are just like trump - too yellow bellied to join the military so they pretend to be brave with their silly little penis extenders.

I was in the Vietnam war and the gun nuttery here makes me want to ask how macho would you feel if what you shoot at could shoot back.

The power feeling from guns comes from being the one who can kill.

This!

The voice of reason. It would be interesting to know how many veterans who actually were in combat support our lax gun laws.

I can see their lips trembling.

It's disappointing that you still don't know the difference.

The media has massively improved the technical accuracy of it's reporting on these issues, which is important to have an informed electorate, and a conversation about changing the laws.

This time they got it right. You didn't.

unless we know their slang terms for various "acts".

They should be scared and ashamed to show their face in public.

I don't remember that any were banned.

and yes some assault weapons were banned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

An AR-15 still works without a flash hiders, bayonet lugs, collapsible stock or grenade launcher attachment point.

Only now that you've removed those features, you're free to call it a "semi-automatic sporting rifle."

The sporting goods store I worked for in college circa 2000 sold plenty of them, all fully legal and ban-compliant.

So no, there was no functional ban. The thing that made the biggest impact IMO was the ban on new high-capacity magazines.

ban those features. They even called it an assault weapon ban, not a few features on assault weapons ban.

What they called it became meaningless when the gun makers removed those features and sold more guns than ever. I have no argument that it was Constitutional; it clearly was and would be again, even with the latest Supreme Court rulings.

My only point in this discussion is that talk of bringing back the old AWB is weak at best because the law was weak back then. We can do better today, but first we have to understand what the old law got right and what it got wrong.

It nailed it on magazine restrictions. It flopped on most of the removable gun parts that it used to define an assault weapons.

but no one's using them for mass murder.

and get your story straight.

I'm done listening to crap.

That's one of my favorites.

So glad I could rely on the knowledgeable people of this site to inform me.

Then we attack!!!

I'd call you "gun nerds" but I have too much respect for real nerds.

Because it's clear that the old AWB got it very wrong by focusing on easily removed features that gun makers just left off and skirted around the law's intent. More AR-15s were sold after the ban that before it, so clearly it failed in that respect.

If you don't recognize this fact, how do you plan on creating new laws that don't allow gun makers to do the same thing?

On the flip side, recognize it's successes and reimplement them. The high-capacity magazine ban worked well; this could easily be brought back.

Knowledge is something the other side fears, not us. Use it to craft a new AWB that gun makers can't circumvent again.

They are all responsible for the mass murders and all of congress and NRA have blood on their hands. Ban assault weapons!!!!!

BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS!!

Real hunters use manual rechambering.
Bolt action.
Lever action.
Single shot.

Those rifles should be allowed.

And semiautos and handguns should be allowed at ranges. You want to fire an assault rifle? Go to a range, and then leave the gun there.

But ban handguns and semiautos otherwise. In other words, pass the laws that are in broad outline at least what Canada and Australia have.

acquiring more weapons only slightly less lethal than fully automatic rifles.

Did you get a couple bump-stocks too to go with your hicap mags?

You took advantage of laws for your sick hobby, assuming you don’t profit from lethal weapons.

he intends to kill everyone. My response was, no I used to lock the door to keep other people out so I didn't have to kill anyone.

As usual, you gunners and Discussionist types, are too obtuse to get the point. Frankly, I don't think you have the mental capacity to own gunz, much less carry them into Chuck E Cheeze or whatever public places you fear for your life or like to be a bully.

Not honoring the intent of law. I must question your intelligence for admitting such a thing in the first place and not recognizing the irony.

lead bullets.

Robbery is not a crime, that makes you a criminal.

were saying it’s OK to blast away with the guns you have tucked in your pants or wherever, endangering others. I pointed out that a criminal might have locked the door for other reasons than killing everyone, something gun-humpers can’t fathom.

By the way, roughly half the gunners dreaming up reasons to shoot and carry guns on that old thread have been removed from DU for right wing BS. What name were you posting under at the time?

Anyone for not honoring the intent of a particular gun control law.

"I'd have to see how the data was collected"
Thanks to NRA lobbying, the CDC is prohibited from collecting data on gun violence because some in Congress think it may be used "to advocate or promote gun control."

Here's an NPR story from three years ago, but it still holds true:
Congress Still Limits Health Research On Gun Violence

How about instead we say not guns with magazines greater than 10 rounds and that all long guns require some sort of manual cocking between shots. Like lever action or pump action. And how about owning or selling 'armor piercing rounds' a felony. You don't need an armor piercing round to shoot a deer.

Pulling all gun conversations into the weeds of semantics and, as you said "nomenclature," is the favorite tactic of the NRA.

In short...shut up and DO SOMETHING!

A .30-06 deer rifle will punch through several Kevlar vests at once with regular hunting bullets, simply because you need energy to kill big game humanely.

I know, nomenclature and minute details suck sometimes, but if you pass a bill accidentally banning hunting ammo you lose millions of rural Democratic voters. Perhaps you were thinking of steel-core ammo? That crap can and should be banned.

Otherwise yeah, 10 rounds max and pump actions sound like a good plan!

Too bad, go buy your meat at the store.

being a felony.

Possessing certain drugs is a felony. Why not make possessing specific kinds of guns a felony.

into chamber of gun-humper’s lethal weapons. Semiautomatics may not kill quiet as rapidly as fully automatic weapons, but they kill fast enough. If not gun-strokers wouldn’t buy them.

Truthfully, someone who has never fired a gun is as entitled to their opinion on lethal weapons as the fools who love how they make them feel.

Anti aircraft rounds on ships were clip feed. So there's that, unless you were born yesterday !

We have got to bring back the assault weapons ban.

kick

All the rest should be banned and confiscated. You either give them up or lose all access to federal benefits, including Social Security, SSDI, Medicare and Medicaid.

We can do this.

No guns were actually banned; they were just tweaked to be compliant and sold like crazy. AR's and AK's were legal in the 90's.

The ban on new magazines holding over 10 rounds though, there was some meat to be had. High rate of fire means jack when you're reloading every few seconds.

But when the ban expired, every AR maker started including 5-6, 30-round magazines with each rifle sold, and BOOM.......

Adam Lanza's rifle was perfectly legal during the AWB.

The OP is wrong.

gunners and their lethal weapons are closely tied to their sense of manhood.

The ad execs identified that flaw in these poor pitiful gun-strokers and exploited it:

What's the quote?

Gun fanatics treat guns as a thinly veiled extension of their (small) penises.

And the gun owners that have to carry their guns to make themselves feel manly.
The ones who are insecure without a gun.

Tell me you can look at this and say that our gun laws do NOT need fixing.

These.
Kids.
Were.
Ripped Apart.
By.
A.
Gun.

America is better than this. Ban these guns. Fix our society.

And gun ownership. You repeat it ad nauseam, why can’t you deliver?

<a href='https://postimages.org/' target='_blank'><img src='' border='0' alt='1518739395632'/></a>

11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030

Literally a.....stone’s throw from Rte 66

1996 Dunblane, Scotland. 16 kids and one teacher killed at school.

Handguns were BANNED in the aftermath.

There has been ZERO mass shootings in UK schools since then, and 5 mass shootings in the UK since 1996 in total.

Now. Did the handgun work? Or did it work?

SANITY

Large cap magazines were still sold everywhere, just got a bit more expensive. The rifles had some cosmetic changes that did not affect operation in any meaningful way. Outlaw an item, someone will get rich inventing a replacement that skirts the law. Might be more effective increase regulation of people instead.

We need strong regulation of ownership. Like getting a driver's license, but on steroids. Extensive training and safety. Licensing and insurance requirements. Registration. Safety inspections. If you want to own a gun, fine, but you have to consistently and repeatedly show you are qualified and safe to own one.

Regulations get tougher and more expensive to comply with as the weapon gets more dangerous.

Courts would likely strike something like that down. GOP would oppose anything that extreme with everything they got.

What's doable? Better background checks. Mandatory reporting to the system of domestic abuse convictions, mental health adjudications and felonies. Right now there's nothing stopping people who have had their day in court from possessing firearms or buying new ones. I doubt such measures could pass the GOP controlled congress or get Trump's signature. But after January, there could be a whole different landscape.

We are simply regulating people in their safe use of firearms, not banning them. After the supreme court ruled in Heller, there are dozens and dozens of cases spawned trying to expand gun rights. The courts have consistently held that use of guns outside the home could be regulated, going so far as in the 2nd Circuit to constitutionally permit a "show cause" regulation that bans firearms outside the home unless you can show cause that you need it to protect yourself.

Note that I said constitutionally defensible. This does not mean guaranteed. We need to continue to work to elect Dems so we can get new laws passed. This is going to be a long battle, but one that is winnable.

With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, they're more likely to find that mentally incompetent people have an affirmative right to own nukes based on Trump's presidency.

Fuck gun people. Fuck the NRA.

It's too bad the ban was lifted and allowed so much of that stuff out there, but most of those guns and magazines are doing no harm. Most of these shooters seem to have usually bought their weapons, ammo and body armor if the use it, fairly recently. Banning that stuff again would definitely help.

1. Ban any firearm chambered for .223 ammunition
2. Buyback all firearms with this caliber
3. Force firearm manufacturers to cover the cost of the buyback - if they refuse, ban them from selling in the United States
4. Have the above completed within 90 days
5. After 90 days - possession of .223 caliber firearm = Felony conviction and mandatory jail time

Sure, it will push to ammosexuals to other semi-automatic calibers like 7.62x39 - if mass shootings increase with this caliber, repeat steps 1-5 above.

Let's face it - the AR15 and similar derivatives have one purpose - killing people. As home defense, there are far more effective solutions. Get the AR15 out of circulation and you'll have a drop of 50% of mass shooting casualties.

Want to spice it up to catch offenders not turning in their guns - offer a bounty. $5000/gun recovered.

Go read your constitution.

It would be wonderful if, instead of looking for ever more efficient, bloody, and Hollywood tough-guy ways of taking life, they would simply get a life, instead...